Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Children to be banned from cycling to (one particular, London) school without number plates

Doing wheelies on your bike is a well-known gateway drug for pensioner mugging :rolleyes:

Arbitrary rules and discipline for its own sake actually makes genuinely harmful transgressions more likely IMO. Kids can spot bullshit a mile off, they know there's no real reason for wearing a school tie or not swearing on the bus. If those pointless rules are then enforced with as much vigour as those which genuinely prevent harm, the kids won't know the difference between a good rule and a bad rule and will instinctively react against both.

Why should a kid trust someone who tells them it's bad to mug pensioners when that person has also told them it's bad to do wheelies? The kid has already tested the second rule and found it to be bullshit, what conclusion do they then draw about the first?
Who said anything about wheelies?

We're talking about cycling in a way that "endangers themselves and others".

Full on reckless shit. Which just might happen to be wheelies if it's down the middle of a busy road towards an oncoming bus but not if it's down a quiet side street with no traffic around.
 
No, fuck that as well.

When my kids want to ride a bike to school it will be down to me if I think they're competent, not the fucking school.
Provided by means they pay for it not carry it out themselves. Professional trainers get brought in not Mr Jefferies from geography.
 
No, fuck that as well.

When my kids want to ride a bike to school it will be down to me if I think they're competent, not the fucking school.

We see loads of kids with death trap bikes proudly explaining that their dad has checked them over. Even though we send the kids home with a guide to checking bikes, the parents still know better.
 
I'm for it.

Teaching kids that just because you aren't in school or at home there are consequences for bad behaviour.

Hopefully it takes root before they get to the 'we can do whatever we like and the pigs can't touch us' mugging pensioners stage.
Because we've been doing it like this for decades, and no kids mug pensioners, ever.
 
Provided by means they pay for it not carry it out themselves. Professional trainers get brought in not Mr Jefferies from geography.

There is often local authority funding for cycle training, or funding for sports and activities that can be spent on cycle training. Our LA funds 900 training places a year, although many of those places don't get used because a school will say they've got thirty kids wanting to do the training and we'll get there and there's only ten. Next year we're asking schools for a deposit to try and avoid this problem.
 
Our school was down a long straight road with a 40mph speed limit and a 60cm wide pavement. Hundreds of kids walking to school along said pavement overtaking each other etc and it was pretty hairy.

It took the head seven years of lobbying the council to get the limit reduced to 30mph. Ridiculous it took so long but that's the sort of thing school management should be doing if they care about the safety of kids outside school. And they should care about that. That's why we had assemblies about not trespassing on the railway. Schools could educate kids on how to cycle to school safely if they feel that is a particular problem with their students. This makes sense because it's a lot easier for the school to arrange visits from Network Rail staff or cycling proficiency classes than it is for parents to do these things.
 
If you're teaching young kids that they can't ride on the pavement you're teaching them wrong.

That home office stuff is about enforcement, not law. We get our procedures from the department for transport, not the home office.

We're supposed to tell kids they can be fined 50 quid for using the pavement, but I don't because frankly it's bollocks and I don't believe in telling lies to kids. I do explain, and demonstrate, why using the road is safer and faster than using the pavement in any normal circumstances.
 
What are the pros /cons of registration and insurance for cyclists?

Pros: appease tory-voting, Surrey-dwelling, middle-aged audi drivers.

Cons: deter people from cycling, increasing traffic and pollution and damaging public health.

Motor vehicles are registered and insured, yet still they boast a death toll that the humble pushbike could only achieve if BMXs started raining from the sky.
 
Plenty of posters here will demand registration and insurance for cyclists with a completely straight face tbf.
A licence with a theory test requirement would be good even if the theory test is online and just one question I'd be happy.

The question:

1. It's late at night, it's dark, you are wearing all dark clothing, you are drunk, your bike has no lights.
Are you?
A. Perfectly safe and entitled to get angry at any car that doesn't spot you until the last second.
B. A dumb cunt that deserves to die.
 
As an adult I don't have to put a licence plate on my bike.
But you should.

This is a superb initiative. Maybe, just maybe, if more like it are adopted across the country, the next generation of cyclists won't all be massively incompetent, arrogant, arse picks, like the current lot are. I think Mr Amin should consider running for Mayor of London.
 
A licence with a theory test requirement would be good even if the theory test is online and just one question I'd be happy.

The question:

1. It's late at night, it's dark, you are wearing all dark clothing, you are drunk, your bike has no lights.
Are you?
A. A perfectly safe and entitled to get angry at any car that doesn't spot you until the last second.
B. A dumb cunt that deserves to die.

I don't think anyone deserves to die. Except people with after-market exhausts on their motorbikes.
 
But you should.

This is a superb initiative. Maybe, just maybe, if more like it are adopted across the country, the next generation of cyclists won't all be massively incompetent, arrogant, arse picks, like the current lot are. I think Mr Amin should consider running for Mayor of London.

I love how car folks give it large about how terrible cyclists are, when it's the people driving around tons of steel and plastic that manage to fucking kill other road users every day, despite the fact that motorists have to be insured and licenced.

Nice glass house you got there.
 
I don't think anyone deserves to die. Except people with after-market exhausts on their motorbikes.
You don't believe in assisted suicide?

I do but I'd prefer to be asked before I assist in their suicide by ninja night riding though... but if they have a cycling death wish doesn't everyone deserve to get their wishes granted?
 
Pros: appease tory-voting, Surrey-dwelling, middle-aged audi drivers.

Cons: deter people from cycling, increasing traffic and pollution and damaging public health.

Motor vehicles are registered and insured, yet still they boast a death toll that the humble pushbike could only achieve if BMXs started raining from the sky.

I imagine for-profit bus companies as well as shithouses like Uber would absolutely love such legislation.
 
I love how car folks give it large about how terrible cyclists are, when it's the people driving around tons of steel and plastic that manage to fucking kill other road users every day, despite the fact that motorists have to be insured and licenced.

Nice glass house you got there.
That's not cars killing cyclists. That's cyclists killing themselves by not respecting tons of steel and plastic that take many yards to stop because of that physics.

Plus the occasional dodgy driver.
 
But you should.

This is a superb initiative. Maybe, just maybe, if more like it are adopted across the country, the next generation of cyclists won't all be massively incompetent, arrogant, arse picks, like the current lot are. I think Mr Amin should consider running for Mayor of London.

What's an arse pick?

But then I suppose typing one-handed often comes at the cost of coherence. No pun intended.
 
Here we go ... "but cars are more dangerous than bikes" ... "Wah! Wah! Wah!"

It's fuck all to do with that. It's about the wanker factor. Recent figures show about 99% of cyclists to be total wankers as opposed to around 46% of motorists. Obviously, reducing the number of cyclists will reduce the amount of wankers we have to put up with.

Next time you think about aiding and abetting wankerism and putting your kid on a bike ask yourself this; "do I want this child to grow up like SpookyFrank or gentlegreen ?"

Then get them driving lessons.
 
It took the head seven years of lobbying the council to get the limit reduced to 30mph.

I think if you're going to lower the speed limit on a road with a lot of school children on narrow pavement then it should be 20mph. Or a system, bit like the no overtaking parked school buses when yellow lights flashing, where it is 30mph but down to 20mph during school opening/closing time when the kids are walking to/from school.
 
I think if you're going to lower the speed limit on a road with a lot of school children on narrow pavement then it should be 20mph. Or a system, bit like the no overtaking parked school buses when yellow lights flashing, where it is 30mph but down to 20mph during school opening/closing time when the kids are walking to/from school.

20mph when the lights are flashing is a good system, some schools do have that in the UK. Plenty of roads are 20mph when they don't need to be for 90% of the time, and that just means drivers ignore the 20 limit 100% of the time.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom